upFRONT

Virus enthusiasts might enjoy this game, first developed by
the well-known computer scientist and author A.K. Dewdney in the
early 1980s as discussed in Scientific
American. In Core War (or Core Wars, as you like), two
or more assembly code programs battle against each other in memory
with the purpose of killing off all the enemies' processes by
forcing them to execute a certain command. The assembly code is
called Redcode, which is rather simple yet wholly adequate, and the
virtual computer which runs the cores is called MARS (Memory Array
Redcode Simulator). Memory arrays can range from tiny to enormous,
and several cores can battle at a given time.

Like many pursuits, learning to play is simple, while
strategies quickly become clever and complex. I spent a great part
of my thirteenth year of life on this game, carrying a calculator
with me to work out algorithms, so be warned—it can become an
obsession. Also, it's good for young people, an easy way to teach
assembly code to kids (well, you can't let them grow up without
knowing asm, can you?).

The standards of Redcode have changed significantly since the
1980s (the initial version ultimately became rather exhausted) and
now allow for much more complex programs, although the basic
strategies remain the same. There are on-line tournaments running
all the time, so you can try your cores against the world's best. A
while ago, a friend found some of our old cores on a
disk (which should tell you how old they are)
and I tried them against the net-warriors—our cores got
terminated, so it appears the standards have improved.
Assembly-code devotees should do very well at this game.

If robots inspire your fancy more than viruses,
RealTimeBattle by Erik Ouchterlony and Ragnar Ouchterlony may be
more to your liking. Essentially, you program a robot to battle
other robots in real time. One thing that distinguishes it from
many programming games is that you can use any language you like to
program your robots, since they communicate to the server through
STDIN and STDOUT. The use of real languages allows for more
legitimate intelligence in the machinery.

Robots are physically identical and have energy, scanners,
cannons and movement devices. The world in which they operate has
gravity, friction, air resistance, bouncing, skidding and the like.
Combat arenas can be large and open or filled with walls, and can
accommodate up to 120 simultaneous robots.

Though already entirely playable, this software is in a state
of continual development. Already I can see many possibilities for
this one, such as an on-line server, massive multi-level maze-like
arenas and so on. Anyone who remembers games like Crobots on the
Amiga or RobotBattle on the unmentionable OS will probably find
this game quite an improvement.

Automata Zero

There comes a time in everyone's life when a squadron of
robots isn't enough. You want an army of robots, designed and
programmed by you. Fine, with Automata Zero, you can have
them—literally an army. And, you not only design and program the
robots, you can program them to respond to real-time commands from
your terminal, and you can change code on the fly. Automata Zero's
graphics are much more advanced than those of Core Wars or
RealTimeBattle and feature aesthetic landscapes with grass, water,
trees and futuristic mechanical structures. The robots themselves
look like Mechs. The development team says graphics are a low
priority, but that's hard to believe when they look so nice. Zed is
the name of the programming language, which doesn't feature dynamic
memory allocation, floating-point operations, threads or pointers,
but does have arrays, functions and scoped variables; it is a
fairly simple mixture of C, BASIC and Matlab. Automata Zero is
still under development and needs more developers. You can visit
Automata Zero's home page at http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~sand/ to
learn how to contribute or just play the game. It's a little closer
to your typical strategic conquest-of-the-world game than the
others. Presumably, if you lose, the world will be overrun with
enemy robots who will come to your basement and blow you up, along
with whatever soda pop you may be harboring. Good luck! (May the
bitstream be with you?)

—Jason Kroll

Stop the Presses: So why is Red Hat worth more than Laos?

Six months ago, Red Hat was a “free” software company that
lost money on less than $11 million in sales in its last fiscal
year. By late summer, it was worth upwards of $7 billion US.
(Perspective: the gross domestic product of Laos is less than $6
billion US, according to the World Factbook.)

Don't waste your time wondering if Red Hat's valuation is
“real” or deserved. We're talking about a real market here: the
market for shares of a company. If that market says the smallest
piece of Red Hat is worth exactly $100, well, it is. Multiply that
by all 66,835,105 equal-sized pieces of Red Hat, and you've got a
company that's worth exactly $6,683,510,400 US. That's the obvious
part.

What's not so obvious is that only 6,000,000 of those shares
were put on the market in Red Hat's IPO (initial public offering)
in August. That's less than 10% of all the stock issues by the
company. The rest were not released to the market. When there's a
lot of demand and highly constrained supply, the price goes up. And
with that price goes the value of all the
company's shares. Neat, huh?

Now think about all the other Linux-related IPOs that should
be coming up. We learned about Cobalt Networks and Andover.net in
September, when there were also rumors about Caldera and VA Linux
Systems. If these companies do even half as well as Red Hat, think
of what that will do for the value of every Linux business.

Trending Topics

Webinar: 8 Signs You’re Beyond Cron

Scheduling Crontabs With an Enterprise Scheduler
11am CDT, April 29th

Join Linux Journal and Pat Cameron, Director of Automation Technology at HelpSystems, as they discuss the eight primary advantages of moving beyond cron job scheduling. In this webinar, you’ll learn about integrating cron with an enterprise scheduler.